What's So Great About Christianity? Part 3

Before I dive into D'Souza's book for part 3 of this series, I want to mention another book that was released this fall on the same topic and has received a lot of attention in the press - "There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind. "In the book the author, Anthony Flew, tells readers how the evidence has led him to change his mind on the question of God's existence. For the record, Flew didn't become a Christian, only a theist in the tradition of Thomas Jefferson.

When Flew changed teams in perhaps the longest debate in human history, reactions varied. If you are interested in reading some of the background and fallout, look here and here and here. Now on to What's So Great About Christianity.

Part 2 Christianity and the West

Overarching Thesis of Part 2: Christianity is the foundation of Western civilization including many of the specific rights and values that secular people hold so dear. If you remove Christianity, then you place those same values and principles on shaky ground. Each chapter in this section addresses a prominent cultural value and shows how that value is rooted in the Christian faith.

My Thoughts on Part 2: There is a great misconception that somehow during the Middle Ages (often misnamed the Dark Ages) the church stunted thinking, science, development, human rights, and every other good and decent thing. This section of the book does a great job of refuting this unsubstantiated idea. If you'd like a whole book devoted to this topic, I would highly recommend Rodney Stark's The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success.

Chapter 5 Render unto Caesar: The Spiritual Basis Of Limited Government

Thesis: The separation of the church's mission and the state's power was a Christian idea long before it was an American idea. When Jesus says to "Render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's" or "My kingdom is not of this world," one thing he is teaching us is that the governments role is limited. For example, the government should not use the power of the sword to convert people to a particular religion.

Key Quote: "Even a government with 99 percent of the popular support does not have the right to tell the remaining 1 percent of the people that they must all become Republicans, vegetarians, or even Christians."

My Thoughts: This issue is particularly relevant today in a world where many Islamic countries seek to advance their religion via force. With the government in charge of both the state and the religious institutions, they feel justified in using any means necessary to spread their faith or impose their religious laws. But Christians who rightly understand the Bible and specifically the teachings of Jesus see that while the government has a God given role, its role is not the same as the church. So I find it interesting that the freedom from theocracy that so many irreligious people value is rooted in the same Christian faith that they so fervently fear.

Chapter 6 The Evil That I Would Not: Christianity and Human Fallibility

Thesis: In this chapter D'Souza tackles a wide variety of subjects including: the family, the "ordinary" person versus the aristocrat, capitalism, and the need for checks on government power. The author uses these topics to show that they all depend on one of Christianity's most basic teachings: the greatness and wretchedness of every sinful human being. Contra the Greek poets who valued the high born, Jesus identified with the lowborn. Contra the Greek philosophers with their over idealized version of blind justice, the Bible teaches that no human being can be trusted to not act in self interest. Finally he argues that capitalism is the economic system most faithful to the biblical teaching on human nature because it uses people's personal selfishness to promote the common good.

Key Quote: "This is what philosopher Charles Taylor calls the 'affirmation of ordinary life'. It is the simple idea that ordinary people are fallible, and yet these fallible people matter."

My Thoughts: Christianity best explains what we can observe in human nature. Every person has the capacity to do good and yet every person is plagued by sin and evil. Of course this is due to the twin truths that we are created in the image of God and every person has been corrupted by sin.

Chapter 7 Created Equal: The Origin of Human Dignity

Thesis: The United States was built on the idea that every person has value, worth, and dignity before God. That core American belief that is deeply cherished by every person is firmly rooted in Christianity. It is this Christian ideal that liberated women from their low status, freed slaves from inhumane treatment, and championed personal freedom.

Key Quote: "The life of the West, Nietzsche said, is based on Christianity. The values of the West are based on Christianity. Some of these values seem to have taken a life of their own, and this gives us the illusion that we can get rid of Christianity and keep the values. This, Nietzsche says, is an illusion...Remove the Christian foundation, and the values must go too."

My Thoughts: Two great resources on showing Christianity's fight against slavery are Jonathan Aitken's John Newton: From Disgrace to Amazing Grace and Eric Metaxas' Amazing Grace: William Wilberforce and the Heroic Campaign to End Slavery.

What to Think About Oprah?

I’m betting there are at least two common reactions to the title of this post. The first originates from those who consider themselves Oprah fans. They might quickly rally to what we could label the “Oh No He Didn’t” perspective, saying something like the following: “He’s done it now. I’ve kinda liked this church blog thing so far, but if he starts criticizing Oprah, then it is soooo on!” The second reaction springs from those who are, shall we say, less favorably disposed to the queen of TV talk. It’s what we might call the “Blood In The Water” reaction, characterized by an I-can’t-wait-to-see-how-he-rips-that-woman-and-then-tell-my-
friends attitude.

Okay, maybe the representative reactions from both sides might not be quite so pyrotechnic, but you get the point. Oprah Winfrey is a polarizing figure.

So I’ll say at the outset that I hope this post satisfies neither extreme. Rather, it seems to me that Oprah is an excellent example of the fact that, if one’s goal is to evaluate things with a biblical perspective, labels like “all good” or “all bad” simply won’t do.

For example, Oprah’s life constitutes an amazing example of fortitude and achievement in the face of adversity. Overcoming both childhood poverty and sexual abuse, she has marshaled her prodigious talent to become a critically acclaimed TV personality and actress, the president of her own influential production company, and the force behind numerous other successful commercial ventures.

She is also exceptionally philanthropic. A 2005 Business Week report estimated her charitable giving at $303 million. Along similar lines, she’s extended her generosity to those who have helped fuel her success, having thanked her employees by taking them, along with their families (1065 people total), on a Hawaiian vacation in 2006.

Finally, Oprah’s well-documented transparency and empathy have earned her the trust and admiration of millions of viewers. And she has brought attention many issues that certainly deserve more cultural concern and action.

On the other hand, despite—or perhaps because of—her affinity for spirituality, Oprah has endorsed perspectives that run directly counter to a biblically informed worldview, including those of the self-help program, The Secret. Particularly because of her enormous personal influence (if Helen of Troy was “the face that launched a thousand ships,” Oprah’s opinion is that which sells a million books), this propensity can be dangerously problematic.

(As a relevant aside: for some time now, I’ve thought an interesting study would result from identifying the comments and beliefs that occasion applause on Oprah. My hunch is that, not only over time, but even occasionally in the same episode, one would find the both Oprah and her studio audience supporting what ultimately are conflicting truth claims—a reality that reflects the often inconsistent thinking of our culture. However, in the absence of the necessary time and resources to engage in said study, that remains only a hunch.)

So what’s the bottom line? Boycott all that is Oprah? Probably not. But just like everything else, Oprah’s TV show, magazine, etc., need to be thoughtfully engaged from an informed biblical foundation. To treat these things as unfailingly harmless or beneficial is terribly foolish. To consider them to be without any redeeming qualities would deny that God’s common grace is spread liberally throughout his creation—a view amply supported by the Scriptures themselves.

It certainly takes wisdom, however, to know what is beneficial and what is not. That means the more relevant question may be this: how capable am I of practicing biblical discernment regarding Oprah…or anything else for that matter? Can I recognize viewpoints that run contrary to biblical truth? Or would I be wise to invest more regularly in the study of Scripture and prayer, not to flee from the culture, but so that I “may be filled with the knowledge of his will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, so as to walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing to him, bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God” (Colossians 1:9-10; italics mine)?

What's So Great About Christianity? Part 2

Last week I promised to use this space to work through Dinesh D'Souza's What's So Great About Christianity. The book is broken into eight parts with three or four chapters in each part. For now, I'm going to try to write one post for each of the parts, but I reserve the right to change that if it's not working. In other words, this is an experiment so who knows how it will turn out. Let me say that this book is written on the level of the "common man." In other words, you don't have to have a PhD in science or philosophy to track with the author's argument.

Chapter 1 The Twilight of Atheism.

Thesis: Across the world, religion is on the rise with Christianity growing the fastest. Here in the United States, it is the more theologically conservative churches that are experiencing the most growth, and the theologically liberal churches that are seeing a decline in attendance. This leaves the atheists shocked and disappointed since they thought that as people advanced scientifically and technologically, they would abandon religion.

Key Quote: Nietzsche's proclamation "God is dead" is now proven false. Nietzsche is dead.

My Thoughts: Throughout history every people group located in every region of the world have possessed religious beliefs. The Bible explains the universal need for religion by saying that we are made in the image of God and were created to live in a perfect relationship with him. Sin has broken that relationship between human beings and God, but it has not destroyed the need and desire to be connected to and worship something greater than ourselves. Even scientific and technological advancement does not diminish the spiritual hunger because they do not address the deep need that all people have for meaning and purpose.

Chapter 2 Survival of the Sacred: Why Religion is Winning

Thesis: If God does not exists and blind Darwinian evolution is true, then religion should be decreasing. In the atheist world view, it simply doesn't make sense that people would evolve in a way that they would believe in things that are false and untrue. According to natural selection, the fittest-not the most gullible-survive.

Key Quote: Biologist Richard Dawkins confesses that religion poses a "major puzzle to anyone who thinks in a Darwinian way."

My Thoughts: The atheist is eventually forced to admit that if there is no God and no eternal life, then life is meaningless. We are nothing more than a collection of atomic particles and feelings like love and heroism nothing more than chemical reactions. But that doesn't square with how anyone (including the atheist) lives their life. Therefore it isn't surprising that the number of committed atheists is dwindling. The atheistic world view simply doesn't fit with what people know to be true about themselves or the world they live in.

Chapter 3 God is not Great: The Atheist Assault on Religion

Thesis: Religious people are naive, gullible, and superstitious. The reason that atheists are confident in that assertion is science. Science, almost always in the form of Darwinism, has led the atheist to believe that all of life can be explained in natural or material terms. Therefore there is no need for God.

Key Quote: But what is it about science that supports atheism? For one, science seems to work better than religion. "We can pray over the cholera victim," Carl Sagan writes, "or we can give her 500 milligrams of tetracycline every twelve hours." In such cases, Sagan points out, even Christians are likely to supplement their prayers with medicine.

My Thoughts: I think that there will be much in this book that deals with the "It isn't rational or reasonable to believe in the Christian God" argument, so I don't feel the need to respond to the whole idea right now. But I do want to point out that Sagan's quote above is the classic straw man argument. No thoughtful Christian, much less the Bible, teaches that belief in a sovereign God negates human responsibility. For example, consider Nehemiah who both prayed and posted a guard (Nehemiah 4). If the atheist wants to criticize Christianity, fine. But he or she is going to have to at least know what the Bible teaches before they offer a contrary point of view.

Chapter 4 Miseducating The Young: Saving Children From Their Parents

Thesis: The new atheists believe that it is incumbent on the educational system to disabuse students of the harmful notion of God. Schools (usually universities) must reverse the "damaging influence of their parents religious instruction."

Key Quote: "Isn't it always a form of child abuse to label children as possessors of beliefs that they are too young to have thought about?" Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion

My Thoughts on Part 1: In the preface of the book, D'Souza makes great points concerning the need for Christians to intelligently engage on the issue of atheism. Too often Christians either retreat behind their castle walls or the resort to name calling and other reactionary responses. I Peter 3:15 calls believers to "Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give reasons for the hope that is within you." As D'Souza points out, this verse requires Christians to know what they believe and be able to articulate in a winsome way. One way that you could grow in both areas is to buy this book and read along with me.

Christianity and Environmental Stewardship: Some Initial Food for Thought

Several months ago, I came across an article regarding the pace that humanity is consuming the earth’s resources. While I realize information regarding environmental issues is often disputed, I have no particular reason to doubt the credibility of the either the article’s author or the report on which it is based (if someone has reasonable evidence to the contrary, please feel free to pass it along). But if in fact this information is reasonably accurate, then it should raise some very serious concerns in the minds of anyone who seeks a God-pleasing approach to the natural world. The following are some notable excerpts:

"On current projections, humanity will be using two planets' worth of natural resources by 2050 — if those resources have not run out by then," the latest report said. "People are turning resources into waste faster than nature can turn waste back into resources."
…………
"For more than 20 years we have exceeded the Earth's ability to support a consumptive lifestyle that is unsustainable and we cannot afford to continue down this path," WWF Director-General James Leape said in releasing the 2006 Living Planet Report in Beijing.

"If everyone around the world lived as those in America, we would need five planets to support us," Leape added.
…………
"Humanity is living off its ecological credit card," Mathis Wackernagel, head of the Global Footprint Network, said in a statement. "While this can be done for a short while, overshoot ultimately leads to liquidation of the planet's ecological assets, and the depletion of resources, such as the forests, oceans and agricultural land upon which our economy depends."

Many of us within evangelical Christianity have long ignored or dismissed those in the green camp—sometimes over larger worldview concerns (on the extreme: raising nature to the level of deity), sometimes because of our own faulty theology (“Who cares? It’s all going to burn anyway.”). But one simply cannot escape the fact that the wise use of the natural world is a biblical mandate.

Yes, the Lord has appointed humanity over the rest of his creation (Psa. 8:3-8), but the Scriptures are also clear that the natural world remains his possession (Psa. 89:11), a possession he loves (Psa. 145:17), finds joy in (Psa. 104:31) and carefully governs (see the whole of Psa. 104). Accordingly, how can we reasonably argue the fact that humanity is called, not to reckless consumption or domination, but nothing less than a stewardship that reflects the Lord’s ownership over and loving disposition toward his creation?

With that foundational conviction in mind, it remains for Christians to thoughtfully consider--especially given the sometimes complex issues involved--how we can shepherd and enjoy the natural world in a more faithful manner.

Incidentally, that sounds like good material for reader comments...and future blog posts.

Books Make Great Christmas Gifts

One of the best Christmas gifts that you can give another person is a good book. With that in mind, I thought that you might be interested in this list of recommended reading by Tim Challies. The list is full of great books in a wide variety of categories. If you want to make a recommendation of your own, use the comments section.

What's So Great About Christianity? Part 1

If you've been paying attention to the cultural discussion in the past few years, you are aware that there is a new and more militant atheism afoot in both America and the UK. The beginning of this "new" atheism and its godless world view is traced back to Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion which was followed by Sam Harris' The End of Faith and Letter to a Christian Nation, and then came Christopher Hitchens' God is Not Great. More than a few Christians have written responses and entered into the debate. If this is a topic that you find interesting, you might want to read Alister McGrath's Dawkins' God or Dawkins' Delusion. McGrath is particularly worth reading not only because he was a committed atheist before becoming a Christian, but also because he has a PhD in molecular biophysics and is therefore able to go toe-to-toe with Dawkins on his own home turf--science.

Dinesh D'Souza, a scholar at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, joined the discussion with his most recent book, What's So Great About Christianity. D'Souza is the author of several books on cultural and political issues and also served in the White House as a domestic policy analyst. I thought that it would be interesting to work though the book together and see if we can learn how as Christians we might respond to some of the intellectual challenges of our day.

For now, here are a few of the recommendations off of the book jacket that I found the most interesting. Note that neither of the last two men would consider themselves Christians. In fact Michael Shermer is himself a well-known atheist. I hope that reading these will encourage some of you to buy the book and read along with me. There are several copies available at Barnes & Noble in the Columbia Mall. I will write more in the next day or so.

"Responding to the current epidemic of atheist manifestos, Dinesh D'Souza applies just the right balm for the troubled soul. Assembling arguments from history, philosophy, theology, and science--yes, science!--he builds a modern and compelling case for faith in a loving God. If you're seeking the truth about God, the universe, and the meaning of life, this is a great place to look."

Francis Collins, director of the Human Genome Institute
"The great merit of this book is that it concedes nothing. Rather than engaging in the usual defective ploys, D'Souza meets every anti-God argument head on and defeats it on its own terms. He subjects atheism and scientific materialism to sustained rigorous interrogation and shows that their claims are empty and incoherent. Infinitely more sophisticated than the rants produced by Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens, What's So Great About Christianity leaves those atheist books in the dust."

Stanley Fish, author of How Milton Works

"As an unbeliever I passionately disagree with Dinesh D'Souza on some of his positions. But he is a first-rate scholar whom I feel absolutely compelled to read. His thorough research and elegant prose have elevated him into the top ranks of those who champion liberty and individual responsibility. Now he adds Christianity to his formula for the good society, and although non-Christians and non-theists may disagree with some of this arguments, we ignore him at our peril. D'Souza's book takes the debate to a new level. Read it."

Michael Shermer, publisher of Skeptic magazine

The Missionary Icon Who Had Nothing Better to Say

If you’ve been around The Crossing long, you’ve probably heard the phrase, “As Christians, we can never get past the gospel.” Adoniram Judson, the first missionary ever sent out from North America in 1812, understood and illustrated this truth.

Here was a man who, for the sake of Christ, gave up almost everything. His biography, To the Golden Shore, by Courtney Anderson tells of his harrowing, and at times terribly sad, tales of imprisonment, persecution, sickness, living in the midst of foreign war, and the death of numerous children and wives. It also tells about how he preached the Gospel of Jesus Christ to thousands and thousands of people in Burma who had never heard it before. In fact, his life work of translating the entire Bible into Burmese has probably meant that millions of people have heard the gospel for generations to come.

That’s why when Judson returned to the U.S. decades after setting sail for Burma, throngs of people swamped him. Anderson writes of the visit to his homeland:

The country was full of men and women who had been hearing all their lives about the great missionary….But although the Judson legend had been growing for 33 years, few now living had ever seen the man himself. This was their chance. Scarcely any celebrity, any public figure, any hero, could hope to rival the interest aroused by the visit of Adoniram Judson to the United States.

It's hard for us to imagine this scene in our culture, but the missionary couldn’t get away from adoring fans everywhere he went. And, Adoniram hated it. He hated that people idolized him and seemed to forget that he was a flawed, sinful man himself.

At one of his stops, he reluctantly agreed to preach to a small congregation. The church was packed with people who had learned he would have something to say. His wife, Emily, later wrote that his 15 minute sermon captured the love of the Savior and “what he has done for us, and what we owe him…with singular simplicity, and…touching pathos.” The rest of the crowd, however, were clearly disappointed that day. Afterwards, several of the people asked Emily why Judson had not talked of something else or told a story.

On his way home from the meeting, she mentioned this to the missionary. Quite an instructive conversation ensued:

“Why, what did they want?” he inquired; “I presented the most interesting subject in the world, to the best of my ability.”

“But they wanted something different—a story.”

“Well, I am sure I gave them a story—the most thrilling one that can be conceived of.”

“But they had heard it before. They wanted something new of a man who had just come from the antipodes.”

“Then I am glad they have it to say, that a man coming from the antipodes had nothing better to tell than the wondrous story of Jesus’ dying love.”

Adoniram Judson got it. Do we? Or, are we mistakenly looking for a more exciting, “new” story and missing out on the greatest one ever told?

God Demands Community: Review of 'Into the Wild'

I'm probably the last person to see the movie Into the Wild who is actually going to watch it in theaters, so I apologize if I am covering old ground. I was not planning on writing any sort of review, but the movie surprised me so I have recorded a few thoughts for your entertainment.

The movie, as you may know, is about the life of Christopher McCandless, the young man who essentially hitch-hiked his way to the Alaskan wilderness and died after a few months. It is based on the best-selling book by Jon Krakauer. Both the book and the movie experienced wide commercial success, but both are criticized for idealizing the life of a young man who essentially killed himself by going Into the Wild without a map and a juvenile understanding of what it meant to "live in the bush."

I was not too excited about the movie for several reasons. First, I had a roommate who went through an annoying period I referred to as his "McCandless period" - it was the best name I could come up with for a period wherein this roommate tried very hard to be McCandless after reading the Krakauer book. Second, I agreed with a great deal of the criticism of the book that focused on the fact that McCandless was a selfish boy whose story is a celebration of selfishness and never ending boyishness.

But I watched it, and I am glad I did.

Artistically, the movie is praiseworthy even if not a strong candidate for Best Picture. Emile Hirsch portrays McCandless and delivers a strong performance, and one that should establish him as a serious actor. His performance in the far less popular Alpha Dog was a strong one as well, but the artistic failures of that movie made it impossible for Hirsch to outshine the movie.

The direction and production quality of this project, however, provide Hirsch with the platform necessary to deliver an admirable performance. I remember watching the movies Ray and Walk the Line and being so persuaded by the acting that it was easy to forget that Ray Charles and Johnny Cash were not IN the movies. I got the same feeling from Into the Wild. As the story progresses, one is easily persuaded that Hirsch must be carrying and nursing the same destructive appetite for adventure and self-approval that drove McCandless to his death.

And it is the progression of events leading to his death that makes the movie worth watching.

Early on in the movie we are given a glimpse into the life of a bright, idealistic and injured young man. Every indication is that he channeled all of those characteristics - his intelligence, his idealism and his hurt - into developing a philosophy of life he would later put into action. It turns out that he tried very hard to model that philosophy of life on the writings of Tolstoy, Jack London and Henry David Thoreau. Like a lot of young men at this stage in life, McCandless allows the ideas of these men to roar inside him like a lion expressing dominion over his territory. The territory was every bit of McCandless's personality and his worldview.

He takes Tolstoy's quest for solitude as a personal calling and leaves his mother and father, his sister, and one can only guess, everyone else who cares about him. He hitch-hikes for over a year and gives his family no word of his whereabouts or whether he is even alive. In his mind, they don't deserve it. They have hurt him, held him back, prevented him from seeing that material possessions dampen our senses. He is justified in abandoning them. The world would be a better place without these artificial constructs of family, community or "society."

He appears to reach the height of obliviousness once he arrives at the iconic abandoned bus in the Alaskan wilderness where he would eventually die. (Yes, he rejects commercialism and society to go into the wilderness and live in a . . . BUS.) While hunting, he approaches a Moose and raises his rifle to shoot the animal, presumably for food. He puts the rifle down upon seeing that the Moose is followed by its offspring. All at once, McCandless acknowledges that there are certain laws that bind the universe: shooting the mother of an infant animal would violate these laws. Similarly, later in the story McCandless does kill a moose, but loses the meat because he is not skilled enough to preserve it. Again demonstrating that he believes the world is bound by certain laws, he expresses his anger at the fact that he wasted the meat, recording the day as one of his saddest ever.

This is what the McCandless critics are getting at. The intense naivete of the protagonist.

Family matters. Community matters. And there is a strand of truth that runs throughout the universe. Leaving all of those for some juvenile adventure is the epitome of selfishness. A rejection of that truth. He touches on that strand of truth almost every time he moves in the wilderness, but can't seem to come to the conclusion that he is violating it by turning his back on everyone who ever cared for him. He raises the rifle and shoots the mother in the heart with every day he chooses to continue his estrangement from her. He does not see that his intelligence, his rebel spirit, and his innate sense of leadership could have benefited at least his family and perhaps the world had he stayed part of it. And I tend to agree with the critics who point to all of these faults in McCandless and his story.

But the end of the movie is where I part ways with most critics.

Critics have failed to point out the fact that McCandless's quest for truth really does come full circle, right at the moment he is dying.

I don't think it is ironic that the movie makes a lot of his attachment to Tolstoy. In Tolstoy's Death of Ivan Ilych, the lead character dies after realizing that the things he was rejecting were exactly what he needed. He embraces redemption and appears to come to faith. Both McCandless and Ilych are said to have forgiven their families for the laundry list of crimes they'd committed against their spirits, both expressed great joy in their last breath of life, and both saw a bright light, just before dying.

McCandless was a deeply flawed individual. Like all of us. But, assuming this portrayal of his life and his embrace of truth is factual -- a real "if" -- it has led me to ask a few serious questions.

"Did God use his restless spirit and purposefully drive him to the wilderness and to his death as a mechanism to save his soul?"

"Could he have landed on the truth without having taken the path he did?"

"Was his family's suffering the Severe Mercy God used to bring about God's glory?"

These questions have definite answers. We get a hint throughout the film that faith had something to do with the conclusion to McCandless's journey. It is subtle, but if you watch closely the books that appear throughout the movie, either in the background or the direct shot, he is constantly seen in the presence of a book by another Russian author: Crime and Punishment, by Dostoevsky.

Raskolnikov, the protagonist of the novel, is a virtual blueprint for McCandless. He is an extreme nihilist, so self-absorbed and proud that he must isolate himself from everyone. He rejects sentiment as a fools errand, social conventions as silly, and he embraces reason to the exclusion of everything else.

At the end of this novel, just like McCandless and just like Ilych, the protagonist sees the folly in the decisions he has made. He throws off his selfishness, his nihilism, and his rejection of community. He thanks God for giving him the wisdom to live a good life. A life that ends with the shining light of TRUTH crowding out all other images his eyes can capture.

Rewards Can Be Dangerous

Question: Why does The Crossing discourage the use of extrinsic rewards (candy, toys, money, etc…) to motivate children to do good things like memorize Bible verses or exercise proper behavior in the classroom?

Before I answer that question, let me offer two definitions.

Extrinsic motivation offers a reward that is not naturally connected to the action. For example, if I offer you money for each “A” you receive on your report card, I am enticing you with an extrinsic reward because money is not the natural reward for learning 7th grade algebra.

Intrinsic motivation offers a reward that is naturally connected to the action. In our previous example the natural reward for learning is greater understanding, ability to solve problems, satisfied curiosity, etc…

So here’s the answer to the question—Extrinsic rewards are very effective in motivating external behavior over a short period of time but they can be very damaging to a child’s heart and long term well being.

Three Ways That Extrinsic Rewards Negatively Affect A Child’s Heart For God...

1. Extrinsic rewards teach kids to do the right thing for the wrong reasons. If I offer a child a piece of candy if she brings her Bible to class, I am teaching her to do the right thing (bring her Bible) for the wrong reason (to get a piece of candy). The Bible calls that sin. Speaking of the Pharisees, in Matthew 15:8 Jesus says, “These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.” Jesus is condemning the Pharisees for doing the right thing for the wrong reason and in doing so he teaches us that our motivations are just as crucial as our behavior. In other words, God isn’t only concerned with what we do. He is equally concerned with why we do the things we do.

So the first reason that we are against using extrinsic rewards in our Children’s Ministry is that if we teach kids to memorize Scripture (or any other good thing) in order to earn a piece of candy, we might be teaching them to become miniature Pharisees. We want kids to be motivated to memorize Bible verses because they see how those verses relate to their life and how they bring joy to their heart. We want them to know the Scriptures because “…They are more precious than gold, than much pure gold; they are sweeter than honey, than honey from the comb. By them your servant is warned; in keeping them there is great reward (Psalm 19:11).

2. Extrinsic rewards also have the unintended consequence of teaching kids to devalue the true treasure. Let me explain. A parent might offer a “reward” to a child for doing something that, in itself, isn’t desirable. For example a mom might say, “Johnny, if you drink your cough syrup, I will let you watch a television show.” Johnny’s incentive to do the bad thing (take the cough syrup) is the opportunity to watch a favorite program. In some cases, that might not be that big of a deal. After all we aren’t trying to get kids to love taking medicine. But if we use that same motivational strategy in another arena it might have unintended harmful effects. Should we say to kids, “If you memorize a Bible verse, then I will give you a piece of candy?” To do so is to send mixed messages. We tell kids that the Bible contains the words of life and at the same time we say to them that we know that they won’t want to learn it unless we offer them something really valuable—a piece of candy.

So the second reason that we are against using extrinsic rewards is because we are against treating spiritual truths as if they are something to be endured instead of something to be enjoyed.

3. Extrinsic rewards rupture relationships. When Christine and I lived in the Chicago area we loved to take our kids to the Brookfield Zoo. After a long, hot afternoon in the sun, we enjoyed sitting down in the coolness of the Dolphin Show. One afternoon watching the dolphins perform their tricks, I realized that it is easy to treat kids like dolphins. The dolphins were trained to perform by giving them a “dolphin treat” when they did what the trainer expected. It is tempting to treat kids like animals and control their behavior through “kid treats”. And in the short run it is effective. All of us have seen kids “perform” in order to get something they want. But as kids grow older they realize what is happening and they resent it. No one wants to be bribed or manipulated—even if it is for a good cause. So when kids realize that that’s what is happening, they resent the people who treat them that way.

Therefore the third reason that we avoid using extrinsic rewards is because we are committed to protecting the long term relationship a child has with his teacher and the church.

Question: If we shouldn’t use extrinsic rewards to motivate kids to learn and do the right thing, how will we motivate them?

Kids don’t need extrinsic rewards to be motivated to learn. They have a natural curiosity that we need to encourage. In fact extrinsic rewards aren’t really for kids at all but for parents and teachers who feel overwhelmed or who aren’t aware of other ways to motivate. Extrinsic rewards are a crutch that parents and teachers tend to rely too heavily on.

One way to motivate kids is through the intrinsic promise of the gospel. The Scripture teaches that true happiness and satisfaction is found in Jesus Christ (John 6:35). Help kids believe that promise.

Another way to motivate kids is through a relationship with an adult who cares about them. Kids naturally love doing things with older people. It makes them feel special. When you are with the kids, take advantage of the relationship that God has given you. Share stories of how the gospel is working itself out in your life. As kids hear how Christ is at work in your life, they will be motivated to follow him.

Do We Still Need the Good News?

Every once in a while a cultural pundit will suggest that our culture is progressing to a point where religion will be unnecessary and/or irrelevant. The thinking behind such an idea seems to be that mankind will gradually be able to address its major problems through its own, seemingly ever-expanding resources. In other words, one day we’ll collectively wake up and realize we no longer need the crutches we now cherish as spiritual truths. Perhaps it’s a notion that continues to echo from the heady days of the Enlightenment, when continual “progress” seemed to be man’s inevitable destiny.

Other factors no doubt weigh in as well, such as the perspective that our accumulated scientific knowledge supposedly militates heavily against God’s existence in the first place (a subject for another time).

How do I respond to this predicted obsolescence of religion/spiritulity? Well, potentially in a number of ways, but I’ll mention just one thought here: I find it very telling that in the United States—the most militarily powerful, affluent, and developed country in the world—there seems to be continual evidence that people long for something that our cultural resources cannot give them. A few examples:

1. I ran across an article in Nov. 5th issue of ESPN Magazine featuring Dean Potter, a man who might best be described as a professional risk-taker. He is involved in free soloing (climbing without safety ropes), BASE jumping (parachuting off buildings, natural formations, etc.), and highlining (picture a less stable version of a tightrope—Potter is the only one in the world who does it without a safety leash). One quote from the article particularly grabbed my attention: “Potter doesn’t want to die, he just wants to come as close to the brink as possible. ‘I’m addicted to the heightened awareness I get when there’s a death consequence,’ he says.” I should also mention that Potter is actively seeking—apparently quite sincerely—a way to achieve unaided human flight.

2. The talented and uber-successful comedic actor Owen Wilson was recently hospitalized for an incident that was reported to the police as an attempted suicide.

3. Listening to the radio in my car recently, I heard a song called “How Far We’ve Come,” the most recent release from Matchbox Twenty—a band that has also seen a huge amount of success over the past several years. Here is a sampling of the lyrics:

I’m waking up at the start of the end of the world 

But it's feeling just like every other morning before 

Now I wonder what my life is going to mean if it's gone



The cars are moving like a half a mile an hour and I 

Started staring at the passengers who're waving goodbye
Can you tell me what was ever really special about me all this time? 



But I believe the world is burning to the ground 

Oh well, I guess we're gonna find out 

Let's see how far we've come 

Let's see how far we've come 

Well I believe it all is coming to an end
Oh well, I guess we're gonna pretend 

Let's see how far we've come 
Let's see how far we've come



I think it turned ten o'clock but I don't really know 

And I can't remember caring for an hour or so 

Started crying and I couldn't stop myself 

I started running but there's no where to run to



I sat down on the street, took a look at myself 

Said where you going man, you know the world is headed for hell? 

Say your goodbyes if you've got someone you can say goodbye to 



I have no idea whether those mentioned in these examples would consciously agree with this assessment, but I would still suggest the common denominator in each of these cases seems to be the recognition of a powerful desire, need, or even fear that simply cannot be addressed by anything currently available to those in question.

Of course, one might argue that, with even more time and more progress, mankind will eventually have the resources to deal with even these profound needs and anxieties. Then again, if such searching and longing is still present (and in fact prevalent) after century upon century of accumulated knowledge and advancement, should we really be that optimistic for such a possibility in the future?

I’m inclined to think there might be a better approach to the issue, one that rings much truer to reality. A passage in Lewis’ Mere Christianity provides the gist:

If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world. If none of my earthly pleasures satisfy it, that does not prove that the universe is a fraud. Probably earthly pleasures were never meant to satisfy it, but only to arouse it, to suggest the real thing.

The “real thing” is precisely the concern of the biblical Christian gospel: the hope—through the work of Christ—of perfect, eternal, and deeply satisfying fellowship with God in the midst of a flawlessly renewed creation.

Let the occasional cultural observer suggest what he or she may. Mankind still possesses a profound need for what has, for nearly two thousand years, been rightly called the "Good News."

And it always will.

nature is a laid trap

I can never go to a wedding without imagining myself getting married; I can never go to a funeral and not imagine myself in the casket. I suppose no contemplative person can.

This past weekend, my friend Luke’s dad died. At the funeral in Belle Fourche, South Dakota, I watched person after person stand and talk about him. They praised his love for his wife and kids, his giving heart, his concern for the people around him. Each of them summed up in a few words, as best they could, their experience of that good man.

Annie Dillard wrote, “We live on mined land. Nature itself is a laid trap. No one makes it through; no one gets out.” Martin Heidegger wrote many cryptic pages saying, among other things, that the only way to live authentically is to accept, not only the possibility, but also the inevitability, of our own death.

As I sat there listening to people at the funeral, it occurred to me a that this is the earthly end of every story. Of my story. “No one makes it through.” One way or another, we all end up in a box. How often do I really think about it? Almost never.

Earlier in the same book, Dillard quotes the Mahabharata saying, “Of the world’s wonders, which is the most wonderful? That no man, though he sees others dying all around him, believes that he himself will die.”

Paul wrote, “Let each one take care how he builds,” and “each of us will give an account of himself to God.” Paul—in fact, every poet and prophet in the Bible—and Jesus himself are telling me that I am accountable for how I spend every minute of my life. And my life, like yours and that of every one we know, is almost over.

That Feeling When You Think of Home

I’ve never been a person who aspired to be a stay-at-home mom. In fact, my impressions of that profession were that you had to be someone who loved to sew, clean, work on craft projects, and other assorted tasks/skills that I just personally don’t enjoy. Underlying my judgmental attitude toward it all, I think, is that I didn’t quite see how I could really be “making a difference for God” while being at home all day. On an even less noble and honest level, I realized that this job is something that is not very valued in our culture. Stay-at-home moms don’t get accolades, and I, quite frankly, didn’t like the idea of that.

Now, after almost a year of staying home with my son, my “tude” is changing a little. In fact, I love it. I haven’t sewn or crafted anything, although cleaning is hard to avoid. I’m also beginning to learn more about how being in this line of work actually can “make a difference for God” or bring glory to God. Now, it is true that there aren’t many public accolades here, but God is helping me to slowly learn to find my approval from Him not others (but that’s for another blog post another day.) Back to the subject at hand…One of the ways stay-at-home moms (well, all parents for that matter) can bring glory to God is to make our homes a place that reflects God. Allow me to explain what I mean.

Charles Spurgeon wrote a great little devotional about how God is our home (look up Nov. 10, 2007 to read it on this link.) He wrote about the verse: "The eternal God is thy refuge."—Deuteronomy 33:27. He mentions that “dear to our hearts is our home, although it be the humblest cottage, or the scantiest garret.” At home we “feel safe,” “we take our rest,” we can let down our guard, and it “is the place of our truest and purest happiness.”

Now, I ask you, what do you think of when you think of home? For me, the idea conjures up warm memories of racing down the stairs Christmas morning with my siblings, playing games around the dining room table and making fun of each other, eating mom’s home-cooked meals, and working on late night school projects with my dad. The idea of "home" is certainly "dear to my heart," and that's partially why the description of God in verses like Deuteronomy 33:27 are so meaningful to me.

You see, if that feeling when we think of home is similar to what Spurgeon described, then we get just a little glimpse of how wonderful it is that God is our refuge, our abode, our home. On the flip side, I imagine that it may be a barrier to understanding this metaphor in Scripture if we don’t have a safe, loving, comfortable home to grow up in. If we don’t long for that feeling of “home,” then perhaps it may be hard for us to long for God as our home. That is where I think my role as a stay-at-home mom comes in. I have an opportunity to create a home that—imperfectly, of course--reflects God as our refuge.

The practical application of this principle probably looks a little different for each of our families. But, I’m starting by praying that God would help me to build a home environment, no matter its physical location or size, where He is magnified and where my family feels His safety, rest, comfort, love, and joy when they are here. Ultimately, I pray that my family would long for God as their refuge as they, by His grace, experience these things in our home.

A Little Unknown Fact about Me

For the sake of making a point, I’m about to share a story (on the world-wide web, no less) of something that may be used against me at some point. At the very least, you’ll be able to laugh at--I mean with--me.

So, Nathan has posted two posts recently about the importance of fellowship in our lives. As he mentioned, the Bible is very clear that we need to be an active part of the “body of Christ” or the “family of believers.” Experiencing life with others is not an option, it is a biblical command. We are called to cultivate deep, authentic relationships with others in order to grow in our faith and become more and more like Christ.

I’ve been thinking about what it is, then, that keeps people (including me) from growing closer to others in the body of Christ. Why is it hard for us to develop the kind of friendships where we are sharing what is really going on in our lives and in our hearts—our struggles, doubts, fears, and even our sin? There are, of course, a variety of reasons, some of which Nathan mentioned. But, I think one reason for me is that I don’t want people to see my shortcomings or my weird quirks or my sin. I subconsciously think, “They won’t accept me if they know how I really am or what I really struggle with.”

A game we played at our small group Christmas party reminded me of the difficulty we all have with being real with one another. Anyone who knows me knows that I love games and that I can be pretty dorky at times. Anyway, I thought it would be fun to play a game where everyone writes down something about themselves that no one else knows and then we could all guess who wrote which “unknown fact." I thought, “This will be a fun way to have people open up a little and let the walls down.”

Since I was running the game I felt compelled to think of something that would really let people see my quirkiness. So, I timidly wrote down my fact that not even Nathan knew about me, laughing heartily to myself about it. “This is going to be fun,” I thought. “I can’t wait to learn more about other people’s idiosyncrasies.” So, I gathered everyone’s responses and began reading them aloud.

What I read floored me! I grew increasingly nervous about reading mine with each “unknown fact” I opened. Here were a few of the “deep, dark secrets” people shared (the authors shall remain nameless, although some of you out there know who you are!):

“I hate it when laundry gets piled up.”
“I can get out any stain from clothes.”
“I sing in the car sometimes.”

I taunted each person’s “unknown fact” as we opened them, hoping they would see that the game was supposed to be about sharing something personal with one another. Secretly, I was hoping that my taunting would make them feel ashamed and somehow make my forthcoming revealing fact seem very praiseworthy and brave of me.

My slip of paper was one of the last ones. As I opened it, I could hardly read it. I was gripped with a mixture of embarrassment and a little fear. Through my nervous giggles I finally got out the words: “I love the smell of my own ear wax.”

Immediately the whole group—who didn’t realize that I was the one who wrote it--pounced on this person’s revealing fact. “Ewwww!” “That is sick!” “Who would like that?” “Maybe that person has an ear infection,” said one of the doctors in the room. Everyone looked around wondering who this overly vulnerable and disgusting person was.

I fessed up. “It’s me, ok? Yes, I like the smell of my own earwax! And, no, I don’t have an ear infection! Look people…I was just trying to be vulnerable,” I laughed at myself, but chided them at the same time. Needless to say, our small group has had some good laughs about it since then.

This story is sort of a silly example but a reminder of how hard it is for people to open up to one another (not that sharing about my earwax fetish makes me an ivory tower or anything!) But, my point is that experiencing real fellowship may mean putting yourself out there and even feeling really silly at times—like I for sure did that night.

It's only as we begin to reveal our true selves to others—quirks, personality, and even our sins—that we can begin to experience real, life-changing fellowship. James 5:16 says, “Make this your common practice: Confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you can live together whole and healed.” God promises to use our openness with other Christians for our good! If we share who we really are, including our sins with one another, He promises that we can have satisfying, whole lives in community.

So, I’d be interested, does anyone else like the smell of their own earwax? (I know you’re trying it out right now!)

No Man is an Island-Part 2

In the previous post on this topic, we saw that God very much expects us to have genuine and substantial relationships with other Christians. Or, to put it more succinctly, he expects us to live in real community with one another.

But why do you suppose that is the case? Why does God want us to pursue a life that’s intentionally and meaningfully connected with others who follow Christ? Well, there are a lot of reasons, but let me just quickly mention a few.

First, the kind of genuine community we’re talking about helps us deal with the challenges and suffering that we sometimes undergo in our lives. Remember the passage from Ecclesiastes 4 that we looked at previously:

10 If one falls down,
his friend can help him up.
But pity the man who falls
and has no one to help him up!
11 Also, if two lie down together, they will keep warm.
But how can one keep warm alone?
12 Though one may be overpowered,
two can defend themselves.
A cord of three strands is not quickly broken.

And Paul gives the Galatians this command:

Gal 6:2: Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ.

We all experience difficulties in our lives, and it’s essential that we have people that can come alongside and help us to deal with them. You might say we need people to be “God in the flesh” to us, providing for our physical, emotional, and spiritual needs in a manner that is consistent with God’s truth and motivated by his promises.

And so the relevant question for all of us is this: do you have people close at hand in your life that will rally around you in a God-pleasing way during a time of need?

Secondly, meaningful Christian relationships help us fight sin in our lives. The book of Hebrews says this:

Heb. 3:12: See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. 13 But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness.

And the apostle Paul tells the Galatians,

6:1: Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently.

Simply put, the Bible doesn’t give us the opportunity to say, “I don’t want people in my business.” It actually commands it. No, we’re not supposed to point out every little thing in people’s lives. We’re certainly supposed to extend grace to one another. But there are times when we need to “speak the truth in love.” And that will sometimes mean having hard conversations, conversations where we point out sin and encourage each other to turn back to the right path of following and trusting Christ.

So again, here’s a question or two to think about: do you have relationships with people who are near to you—people who are trusting Christ and who see your life on a regular basis—who you’re willing to let speak into your life about your sin? Or do you wall yourself off and/or get defensive when someone tries to talk to you about your sin? Who is a Christian friend who would say, “Yes, he’d let me confront him, and at the end of the day he’d be glad I did”?

Third, you need to be in substantial relationships with Christians because God has gifted and equipped you to serve them. The Bible describes the relationship between those who follow Christ with the image of a body, where all the parts are connected to him as the head, but yet are dependent upon one another.

Paul puts it this way:

Ephesians 5:15: …we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. 16 From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.

Of course, we all know if one body part is missing or not working properly, the whole body suffers (see 1 Corinthians 12). For example, if you sprain your ankle, the rest of your body’s ability to play basketball will be severely impeded.

So the point is this: if you belong to Christ, you’re a part of the body and you have a role to play. Because Christ is empowering you, you’ve got something to bring to the table that other people need for their encouragement and growth. If you fail to do so, however, they will suffer loss.

That is why, for example, we state that meaningful membership at The Crossing entails serving in some way—ideally in a way you enjoy and are gifted for, whether that’s teaching kids’ classes, making coffee, parking cars, participating in the worship team, greeting others, visiting people in the hospital, mowing the grass, counseling those in need, leading small group Bible studies, stuffing envelopes, and so on.

Christianity is not a spectator sport. All of us should be serving other Christians. They have a need what you have to offer. So the practical question in this case becomes, “Where am I serving the body of Christ?”

Having noted these three reasons for participating in community, let me begin to bring this post to a close by also saying this: there are definite obstacles in developing these kinds of relationships. We have to be willing to be open and vulnerable with our lives—that means giving people the opportunity to disappoint or even hurt us. We also have to be wiling to invest significant time. These kinds of relationships usually don’t develop overnight. And because of these obstacles, it’s easy to think, “I don’t really want to put forth the effort. I don’t want to be hurt and I don’t want to give up the time.”

My response: that’s tough. Yes, you may feel that way, but this is a huge priority from God’s standpoint. He’s aware of the difficulties and he wants us to do it anyway. And that, at the end of the day, simply trumps your feelings on the matter.

But I’m not just suggesting that you suck it up and commit to deeper relationships. Instead, I want to remind you of one last important fact: the ultimate reason God wants us to live in meaningful community with one another is that it will encourage all of us to trust in and follow Christ. And that, the Bible promises, is the place where we will find the most joy and satisfaction and fulfillment in our lives. That is something we can bank on.

So what will it be in your life? Will you cling to a life of impoverished isolation, or intentionally embrace the grace of genuine Christian community?

Pain, Pain Go Away... Part 3

Perhaps the best way that we can gain a Biblical understanding of pain and suffering is by looking to our Savior, Jesus Christ. It is universally agreed upon that the historical Jesus suffered and died a cruel and terrible death by crucifixion, and in doing so, he is certainly able to offer us a perspective on affliction that is relevant to our human experience.

Here are several things that I think we can learn from Christ's earthly suffering:

1. Christ suffered with humility. Although he was by very nature God, Christ knew that it was the will of God the Father that he endure suffering for the purpose of reconciling God's chosen people to Himself. He therefore faced the cup he was given with obedience and humility, though he was innocent and had known no sin himself. Paul urges us in the book of Philippians to "have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, [who] humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross (2:5,8)." We are asked to follow in the steps of our Savior, who left us an example of a humble, suffering servant. John Stott rightly remarks, "Perhaps nothing is more completely opposed to our natural instincts than this command not to resist, but to bear unjust suffering and overcome evil with good." Christians are nontheless called to act in opposition to the natural human reaction to fight, run or resist against suffering, and to face it with humility.

2. Christ suffered temporal, earthly pain for the sake of eternal, heavenly joy. Paul goes on to say that following Christ's submission to death on the cross, "God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name (2:9)." In other words, Christ's excruciating pain had a divine purpose: that his name would be glorified in all the earth. He has not endured the suffering to earn either the praise of pity of men. The ultimate meaning ascribed to his pain hinged on what it accomplished eternally: the display of the glory of the grace of God through his suffering and death. And furthermore, since he is aquainted with our human grief and pain so intimately, he is able to offer comfort and hope for even the bleakest human afflictions.

3. Christ's suffering conquered sin and death. Christ's suffering achieved for us what we could never have done on our own. Since we have all broken God's holy law, we are all deserving of pain, sorrow, and death: we are simply under a divine curse with no way out. Yet through Christ's death, we are freed from the curse, and offered eternal life. No other human suffering, though tragic, could accomplish this cosmic transaction; he became sin, that we might become the righteousness of God.

4. Our suffering can fulfill God's purposes of increasing our faith and holiness. Sometimes our personal pain is God's divine discipline, or pruning, in our lives. Over the centuries, Christians have suffered for the sake of Christ and because God's desire is to "wean us from the world and to set our hope fully in God alone (John Piper, "Suffering and the Sovereignty of God)", He may allow significant pain in the life of a believer so that our hearts would be open to greater faith and that we would be made more and more like Christ. He wants to do this in the life of every one of His children. Is it not more likely that you will become disenchanted and unenticed by the trappings of this world when you are faced with pain, discomfort, mortality? What does God want to accomplish in your life through your struggles, pain or heartache?

If God Is Sovereign, Then Why Pray For People?

I recently received an email from a woman who used to attend The Crossing but now she and her husband live elsewhere. She opens the email by telling me how she is leading a Bible Study with 12 women and only 4 of them are Christians. Then she writes this…

“If God has ultimately predestined each person before the beginning of man, then why should I spend time on my knees and investing in all of these relationships of women and couples that don't know Him? Again, I know it's a lie but I can't find the truth.... I am sacrificing what little time I have with my husband in hope that these women come to a saving faith in Christ. Why, if ultimately it isn't their choice? I know God is sovereign and I know that it's not for me to decide what is just and fair... but how should I as a believer be spending my time in a way that is pleasing to Him?”

Here’s my answer…

It is great to hear that God is using you in your new city. Your heart for people is as strong as ever, and you continue to ask good questions. I think the question you’re asking this: “If God sovereignly chooses or elects those who will believe in him, then why should I sacrifice my time to pray and share the gospel with people? After all, won’t he bring to faith those he has chosen whether or not I pray for them and share Christ with them.”

Let me take a stab at answering that question by giving you 7 reasons that prayer and outreach are compatible with God’s sovereign and unconditional election.

But first let me briefly define the term “unconditional election.” In his Systematic Theology, Wayne Grudem defines it this way: “Election is an act of God before creation in which he chooses some people to be saved, not on account of any foreseen merit in them [this is the reason it is called “unconditional”—God’s choice is not based on a person’s faith], but only because of his sovereign good pleasure.

1. God’s election motivated Paul to endure great suffering.

2 Timothy 2:10 Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory.

Now think for a moment about all that Paul endured. According to 2 Corinthians 11 he suffered imprisonments, countless beatings, and was often near death. On five different occasions he was subjected to 39 lashes by the Jewish authorities, three times he was beaten with rods, once he was shipwrecked. And the list goes on and on and on. So Paul believed that the normal way that the elect came to faith is through the labors of Christians and sometimes even through their sufferings.

2. God’s election motivates us to “stay the course” in ministry.

Acts 18:9-11 One night the Lord spoke to Paul in a vision: "Do not be afraid; keep on speaking, do not be silent. For I am with you, and no one is going to attack and harm you, because I have many people in this city." So Paul stayed for a year and a half, teaching them the word of God.

Now if election meant that our efforts and ministry didn’t matter, we’d expect Paul to say something to the effect of, “Well since God has people in this city, I guess that I will head somewhere else.” But Paul does the exact opposite. He stays and ministers another eighteen months. Why? Because he knows that divine election doesn’t in any way negate his need to minister to people.


3. God’s election doesn’t negate the significance of secondary causes.

Do you think that God knows when you will die? Of course you do because God knows all things before they happen. In Psalm 139:16 we learn that all of our days were written in God’s book before one of them ever happened. So let me ask you another question, “Why do you breathe. Or eat. Or look both ways before walking across a busy street” In other words, if God knows exactly when you will die, then why do you do the things that keep yourself alive? Aren’t those things rendered unnecessary by the fact that God has already established the day you will die?

My guess is that you’d say that you breathe and eat and take common cautions because those are the means that God uses to sustain your life. Intuitively, you understand that God’s sovereignty over your living and dying doesn’t render your actions useless, nor does it promote irresponsibility. Well in a similar way, God has already established who will come to faith in Jesus but prayer and personal outreach are the means he uses to bring about their faith. God’s sovereignty over salvation doesn’t render your ministry useless, nor does it lead to apathy if it is properly understood.

4. God’s election didn’t stop Jesus from calling people to faith.

Matthew 11:25-30 At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure. "All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him. "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light."

Jesus affirms that God hides truth to some and reveals it to others. And then in the very next verse, Jesus issues a call for people to come to him in faith. Jesus didn’t believe that God’s sovereignty in salvation alleviated Christians’ responsibility to share the gospel, nor did it alleviate a person’s responsibility to believe the gospel.

5. God’s election didn’t stop Paul from calling the church to pray for the progress of the gospel.


2 Thessalonians 2:13-14 But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth. He called you to this through our gospel, that you might share in the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

2 Thessalonians 3:1 Finally, brothers, pray for us that the message of the Lord may spread rapidly and be honored, just as it was with you.

Notice that within just a few verses of each other Paul could discuss the fact that salvation was due to God’s choosing and yet ask the church to pray for the success of his ministry efforts. So clearly the fact that God chooses (or elects) some for salvation didn’t lead him to prayerlessness.


6. God’s election actually motivates us to pray for people’s salvation.

If God does not sovereignly elect people to salvation, then it doesn’t make any sense to pray for their salvation. For just a moment let’s say that a person’s salvation is left up to him alone. In other words, God gives the person freedom to believe or not believe but he doesn’t cause them to believe. If that were the case, why would you pray and ask God to cause the person to believe? Why would you ask God to make the person a Christian?

It only makes sense to ask God to do things that you believe he does. If God doesn’t cause a person to believe the gospel, then don’t ask him to do just that. But here’s the rub: When you pray you often ask God to cause a friend, a classmate, or a family member to become a Christian. And rightly so. But what we find is that your prayers reveal that you believe that it is God and not the individual who ultimately determines whether someone believes the gospel.

Here’s how John Piper puts in The Pleasures of God…

“People who really believe that man must have the ultimate power of self-determination, can’t consistently pray that God would convert unbelieving sinners. Why? Because if they pray for divine influence in a sinner’s life, they are either praying for a successful influence (which takes away the sinner’s ultimate self-determination), or they are praying for an unsuccessful influence (which is not praying for God to convert the sinner). So either you give up praying for God to convert sinners or you give up ultimate human self-determination.”

7. God’s election should bring us great comfort and hope.

J. I. Packer, Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God…

“While we must always remember that it is our responsibility to proclaim salvation, we must never forget that it is God who saves. It is God who brings men and women under the sound of the gospel, and it is God who brings them to faith in Christ. Our evangelistic work is the instrument that He uses for this purpose, but the power that saves is not the instrument: it is in the hand of the One who uses the instrument. We must not at any stage forget that. For if we forget that it is God’s prerogative to give results when the gospel is preached, we shall start to think that it is our responsibility to secure them. And if we forget that only God can give faith, we shall start to think that the making of converts depends, in the last analysis, not on God, but on us, and that the decisive factor is the way in which we evangelize.”

No Man is an Island-Part 1

A few weeks ago, I noted that biblical Christianity often is at odds with central values within our American culture. To expand on that a bit, I thought it might be instructive to look at one example in more detail.

It stands without question that the notions of individualism and self-reliance are foundational to the American mindset. For example, most of us dislike other people knowing about or getting into the deeper issues of our lives. Nor do we relish the idea of depending on or being indebted in some way to others if we can help it. And who among us really wants our lives tied down by the needs of other people? We approvingly point to those who are “willing to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.” To sum up, we often have an attitude that we all should mind our own business and take care of ourselves.

Now, all of that would be fine except for one thing…it’s not what God desires for our lives to look like at all. In fact, the Bible paints a much different picture of how we’re meant to live than the perspective I just outlined. Over and over again, it communicates the idea that you and I are intended to live alongside and be dependent on one another. In other words, we’re meant for genuine community.

We actually don’t have to go too far in the Bible to catch the idea that that God desires us to live in meaningful connection with one another. In the second chapter of Genesis, the Bible tells us that God forms Adam out of the dust of the earth and breaths life into him. But notice what God says soon after that:

Gen. 2:18: The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

The chapter then goes on to relate how Adam sees and names all the animals that God has made, but none of them are able to fill the role of what God calls a “suitable helper.” And so you might remember what happens next. God creates Eve, another human being, to be Adam’s wife. And finally Adam’s need—a need not to be alone, a need for community—is met.

Another place that we find the Bible affirming how important it is for us to move past the idea that we’re supposed to live life on our own is this memorable passage from Ecclesiastes 4:

9 Two are better than one,
because they have a good return for their work:
10 If one falls down,
his friend can help him up.
But pity the man who falls
and has no one to help him up!
11 Also, if two lie down together, they will keep warm.
But how can one keep warm alone?
12 Though one may be overpowered,
two can defend themselves.
A cord of three strands is not quickly broken.

Note the simple, but convincing biblical arithmetic: two are better than one; a cord of three strands is not easily broken.

And finally, while there are many other ways the Bible conveys our need to live in substantial community with other people, I’ll be content with drawing attention to just one more. The following are all biblical commands—addressed to Christians no less—that are found in the New Testament:

• Love one another
• Be devoted to one another in brotherly love
• Honor one another
• Accept one another as Christ accepted you
• Instruct one another
• Greet one another
• Serve one another
• Carry each other’s burdens
• Bear with one another
• Be kind and compassionate to one another
• Submit to one another
• Forgive one another
• Teach and admonish one another
• Encourage one another
• Spur one another on toward love and good deeds
• Live in harmony with one another
• Offer hospitality to one another
• Clothe yourselves with humility toward one another

Taking stock of that list, one doesn’t exactly need a great deal of interpretive skill to grasp the idea that God is opposed to you and I living isolated from and uninvolved with other Christians. Instead, our lives are supposed to be connected with others who trust Christ in all kinds of meaningful ways.

The old saying rings profoundly true when compared with the biblical vision: no man is an island. Perhaps it should come as no surprise that those words originate from one John Donne—one of the finer English poets who ever put pen to paper and a committed follower of Christ.

The bottom line: if we take the Scriptures seriously, we simply can’t be content with the cultural inertia toward individualistic self-sufficiency. We’re called to live interdependently with one another as fellow members of Christ’s body.

In part two we’ll touch on the some of the reasons God has commanded us to live in genuine Christian community.

2 Movies You Might Want To See

The first is Prince Caspian...





The second is Bella...

It's Hard to be Proud When You're Close to the Cross

Even though God obviously hates all sin it seems as we survey the Bible that pride is at the top of his list. When the personified wisdom of God speaks in Proverbs he says this:
“I hate pride and arrogance.” (Proverbs 8:13, NIV)

Why does God hate pride so much? Well pride is when we as humans aspire to the status and position of God and we fail to acknowledge our dependence on him. Pride is when we seek to rob God of his glory by glorifying ourselves. No wonder he hates it so much.

I have been reading from C. J. Mahaney’s book called “Humility – True Greatness”. I wanted to pass on an excerpt to you because I think he offers a very practical way to fight pride and cultivate humility in our lives. I hope you find Mahaney’s thoughts helpful from the fifth chapter of his book…


REFLECT ON THE WONDER OF THE CROSS

Martyn Lloyd-Jones wrote the following about the surest way to pursue humility:

There is only one thing I know of that crushes me to the ground and humiliates me to the dust, and that is to look at the Son of God, and especially contemplate the cross.

When I survey the wondrous cross
On which the Prince of Glory died,
My richest gain I count but loss
And pour contempt on all my pride.

Nothing else can do it. When I see that I am a sinner…that nothing but the Son of God on the cross can save me, I’m humbled to the dust…Nothing but the cross can give us this spirit of humility.

John Stott helps us understand why the cross has this powerful effect:

Every time we look at the cross Christ seems to be saying to us, “I am here because of you. It is your sin I am bearing, your curse I am suffering, your debt I am paying, your death I am dying.” Nothing in history or in the universe cuts us down to size like the cross. All of us have inflated views of ourselves, especially in self-righteousness, until we have visited a place called Calvary. It is there, at the foot of the cross, that we shrink to our true size.

I once had the privilege of spending an hour with Don Carson, Bible scholar and professor at Trinity Evangelical Seminary. In the course of our conversation, he told me of an interview he had with the late Carl Henry, perhaps the foremost evangelical theologian of the latter half of the twentieth century. Dr. Henry was characterized by not only brilliance but also humility—a rare combination. So Dr. Carson asked him how he had remained humble for so many decades.
Listening to Dr. Carson, I sat poised with pen and paper, ready to record Carl Henry’s answer. This was it: “How can anyone be arrogant when he stands beside the cross?”


So many times since that conversation, I’ve thought, "Father, I want to stand as close to the cross as I possibly can, because it’s harder for me to be arrogant when I’m there."

The cross never flatters us. Stott also wrote, “Far from offering us flattery, the cross undermines our self-righteousness, and we can stand before it only with a bowed head and a broken spirit.”

This book by Mahaney offers many insightful ways to deal with pride in our lives and is easy to read. If you’re interested, you can pick up a copy of it in The Crossing bookstore.

Warnings about "The Golden Compass"

My email has been getting flooded the last couple of days with Christians warning about an upcoming film called The Golden Compass, due to be released in theatres on Dec. 7. This film is based upon the first book of a trilogy written by Philip Pullman called His Dark Materials.

I’ve read the book and, personally, I’m looking forward to seeing the film. Yes, the author is a self-proclaimed atheist who wrote his trilogy as an atheist’s answer to C.S. Lewis’ The Chronicles of Narnia. Like most trilogies, the first book is subtler in its message. And as you get to books two and three, his atheistic message becomes more blatant and “evangelistic.”

So how should Christians respond to this film? We could, as many of the emails I’ve received have advocated, “boycott” this film and “send a message to Hollywood” that we won’t tolerate “anti-Christian” films aimed at families.

But if we were consistent in that, then we should have done the same with other “anti-Christian” films aimed at families, such as the Star Wars movies, which were the highly entertaining products of George Lucas’ desire to bring blatant Buddhism to a young western audience. The same aggressive and straightforward Buddhist message is in The Matrix films as well. I don’t think Buddhism is any less dangerous than atheism. Perhaps it is more dangerous because it is atheism disguised as spirituality. But for some reason I can’t remember any Christian alarms about boycotting any of the Star Wars or Matrix films.

I think most of us want to be Christians who appreciate good art and good literature (which these Philip Pullman books certainly are) and are not alarmed and threatened by the atheism issue any more than we were threatened by the Buddhism issue with Star Wars or The Matrix. Rather, we want to take opportunities like these to have important conversations with people about beliefs about God.

Now, personally, I don’t know that I’d take my kids, if they were young, to see The Golden Compass unless I was prepared to discuss with them the underlying beliefs and why this is such an important issue for all of life and how everyone is responsible to decide one way or the other on the issues of God, Jesus Christ, sin, etc.—that these are issues that are forced upon everyone to decide for themselves one way or the other. I would say something along the lines of “Here’s what the author of this book/film believes and here’s what he’s saying about that. But here’s why I don’t believe that and here’s what I believe and why I believe that,” etc. The film provides a wonderful prop around which to have a more interesting conversation about beliefs.

So these kinds of films can provide a good opportunity for fun entertainment while also getting a chance to have important conversations with our kids about other worldviews and beliefs, and to show that we have thought about those arguments (rather than hide from them), we understand and respect their arguments, and we are not threatened by them, but rather feel we have better reasons to believe what we believe. All in a calm, rational, non-alarmist kind of manner. In raising my own kids, I’ve found these kinds of conversations helpful in inoculating them from the very real anti-Christian beliefs out there that will definitely come their way in life. I’d rather them here about them in a context I can inform rather than not.

I’m not necessarily recommending parents take their kids to see this film, and in that sense I think Christians are wise to warn one another of a need for some caution on that. On the other hand, it can be a good opportunity to help your kids discuss its deeper implications and issues if you’re prepared to do so.